RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBERS:  01-02507
		INDEX CODE 111.02 111.03 111.05
		COUNSEL:  None

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  Not Indicated

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) closing 12 May 99 be declared void and removed from his records 

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His evaluators were biased against him during the reporting period because of accusations of violating a lawful general regulation, for which a special court-martial found him not guilty. The initial feedback date on the EPR in question is falsified; the comments in Sections V and VI are inconsistent with markings in Section III.  He filed a complaint with the Inspector General (IG), who would not get involved due to the fact he was under a judicial investigation.  The evaluators refused to respond when he asked for statements.

The applicant provides a copy of his appeal package submitted to the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB). His complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of technical sergeant (date of rank: 1 Feb 99). He filed a similar appeal under the provisions of AFR 31-11/AFI 36-2401, which was considered and denied by the ERAB on 5 Sep 00. 

The overall ratings of his EPRs from 12 Dec 93 to 21 Feb 01 are: 4, 5, 5, 4, 5, 5, 5, 4 (contested EPR), 5 and 5.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the official documents provided in the applicant’s submission (Exhibit A) and in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force (Exhibits B and C). 
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPWB notes that should the Board void the report, the applicant would be entitled to supplemental promotion consideration to master sergeant for the 01E7 cycle, providing he is otherwise eligible. However, he would not be selected as his total score would increase to 315.40 and the score required for selection in his Air Force Specialty Code is 317.41.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit B.

HQ AFPC/DPPPEP indicates that, due to the investigation and subsequent loss of his line badge, the applicant was unable to perform his normal duties. Therefore, he was appropriately detailed around the base where he could be utilized as a viable Air Force asset.  This does not prove the evaluators were biased.  Many individuals have to perform duties without the benefit of direct daily supervision. There is nothing to indicate the rater did not obtain meaningful information on the applicant’s duty performance from as many reliable sources as possible. Additionally, the applicant did not prove only one feedback session occurred. He has not provided convincing evidence that the evaluators were biased and unable to render an accurate assessment or that the report itself is erroneous.  Denial is recommended.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant asserts he posed no security threat and asks why would he be assigned to another fighter squadron after the acquittal by court-martial, performing the same job with no line badge for the next six months. He was subjected to public and professional humiliation, being on display in front of his colleagues and subordinates. His rater failed to obtain meaningful information on his duty performance. His supervisor was on temporary duty (TDY) during the month of Nov 98, on leave during the month of Dec 98, and TDY from Feb 99 through Jun 99.  The majority of evaluators will not put their career on the line stating they violated an Air Force Instruction. People and the system are not perfect, and common sense and the ability to read between the lines are needed.
 
A complete copy of applicant’s response is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.  After reviewing the applicant’s submittal and performance record, we are persuaded that the evaluators may have been adversely influenced by allegations made against him during the period in question, and for which he was subsequently found not guilty. While no rating chain statements were provided, we note the inconsistencies between the comments in Sections V and VI and the rankings in Section III.  While we cannot determine absolutely that this stemmed from biased, inaccurate assessments, we believe any possibility of doubt should be resolved in this applicant’s favor. We therefore recommend that the contested EPR be declared void and removed from his records.  The EPR was first considered in promotion cycle 01E7. However, since its removal would not raise the applicant’s total score for this cycle sufficient for selection to master sergeant, we do not recommend he be afforded supplemental promotion consideration.

___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT, be corrected to show that the Enlisted Performance Report, AF Form 910, rendered for the period 13 May 98 through 12 May 99 be declared void and removed from his records.   

___________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 15 November 2001 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

Panel Chair
Member
Member

All members voted to correct the records, as recommended.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Aug 01, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 10 Sep 01.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPEP, dated 20 Sep 01.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Oct 01.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 12 Oct 01.

                                   

AFBCMR 01-02507

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

	Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

	The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to                     , be corrected to show that the Enlisted Performance Report, AF Form 910, rendered for the period 13 May 1998 through 12 May 1999 be, and hereby is, declared void and removed from his records.